sek69 Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 I guess SK is tired of his match reviews getting absolutely dismantled by people who know what they're talking about: over at his blog he unveiled his new format, which is just result-time of match-star rating. Cause you know, explaining your star ratings is so last tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dazed Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 But Scott can ONLY do PBP. I actually like the new format, it gets to the point quite well. Shame it's wasted on him (rather like Dames' format at TSM). My only complaint would be the lack of depth. " - Jericho turns heel bigtime, although sucking the heat away from the Christian-Cena feud in the process. " is an interesting comment, and could do with something more by way of explanation. But that's just not Scott's style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 He had a post about a week or two ago and basically said he was getting sick of Raw and was considering just doing PPVs for awhile. I guess this is his way of keeping interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 He'll never fade away if he's always a topic of conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 I guess SK is tired of his match reviews getting absolutely dismantled by people who know what they're talking aboutAre you joking? People have ripped on Scott Keith's reviews for years and it never stopped him. There's a reason he wants to stop reviewing Raw, and it sure as hell isn't "Tim Cooke and his friends embarrassed me." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Kawada is right. Despite the dismantling of SK and his shitty writing time and time again, people continue to read him and value his opinion. However, "Tim Cooke and his friends" were right in their argument and SK looked like a bitch when he couldn't respond to any point made. Also, not reviewing RAW because it is a shitty show is no excuse. If he insists on writing shitty recaps, he should be forced to watch shitty wrestling. He gives the shit too much credit and never does justice to the great stuff. he sucks . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SweetMama Scaat Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Now I might be all kinds of crazy mistaken but isnt Scott Keith a douchebag with poor social skills and limited proper grooming? Now yall gots to let me know, arn't they're some good recappers people could be reading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 I've always maintained that Scott Keith's success has more to do with the fact that he's reviewed more US footage than anyone else. If we can ever find a good reviewer to step up and cover *all* of the WCW and WWF PPVs, and most of the TV, he'll become an afterthought rather quickly. As it is, he's too convenient to be irrelevant, and that's the only reason he's still as popular as he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 He also was reviewing all of the U.S. footage at the peak of the wrestling boom. It also doesn't hurt that he was writing for Wrestleline which is how more than one person found their way onto the wrestling internet scene. I know rob and I are two guys who came on that route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 I've always maintained that Scott Keith's success has more to do with the fact that he's reviewed more US footage than anyone else. If we can ever find a good reviewer to step up and cover *all* of the WCW and WWF PPVs, and most of the TV, he'll become an afterthought rather quickly. As it is, he's too convenient to be irrelevant, and that's the only reason he's still as popular as he is. I agree about the convenience factor, and I think it's wearing off. The more sites SK jumps to for whatever reason, the less convenient any archives of his is, where people can access, yep, more U.S. show reviews than elsewhere. The last place he had this was 411, and even those archives weren't nearly as good as the old Rantsylvania ones. He's quickly becoming an afterthought, for that reason alone. A better reviewer who could cover everything (as you said) is the nail in the coffin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 He also was reviewing all of the U.S. footage at the peak of the wrestling boom. It also doesn't hurt that he was writing for Wrestleline which is how more than one person found their way onto the wrestling internet scene. I know rob and I are two guys who came on that route. That would make three of us who came on that route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted June 14, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 He's always been at the right place at the right time, and has a knack for leaving a site just when they're about to go down the shitter. The question remains, if it's all a matter of him having the largest body of work for US wrestling, why hasn't someone with an equal sized collection come around and do it better? The match review folder here has at least 5 people off the top of my head who have tape collections that probably rival his and do a much better job reviewing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Dude, it may not seem like it but some of us actually have lives. I mean, think about it. I would venture to say none of us look as horrible as that guy and none of us have probably had as many dry spells as him... maybe. I watch and record wrestling obsessively and I bet my life is still more active than his has ever been. I post on this message board like mad but I bet my social life is still healthier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Not to belabor a point that has been made many times, but speaking of that, I don't think anyone would care what Scott Keith looked like if he didn't talk so much shit and make himself out to be too cool for the room. I typically have a problem with people trashing someone for their appearance, but in Scott's case, it's only because of the medicine he dispenses. Anyway, I know all this has been said a million times before, and I don't want to drive this into the ground. I hate even talking about him at this point honestly, but considering how many readers he has and how often he gets namedropped, it's bound to happen sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Exactly! Hell, how many times has that fat f**k insulted someone's appearance to end up looking like he does. When I first read articles on the net abut wrestling I had no idea that the majority of those guys were overweight pimply nerds. I really thougt they would be just normal looking joes. How wrong was I? There is a reason a trash talker like Hyatte never shows his face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 The question remains, if it's all a matter of him having the largest body of work for US wrestling, why hasn't someone with an equal sized collection come around and do it better? Have you ever reviewed a three hour PPV? It takes a looong time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Cooke Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Loss is right. Huge archive of reviews during the late 90's boom. He did make me laugh in his ECW ONS review that Rey Jr. should have been replaced by London. I love London but that isn't the solution. The solution would have been to have a 15 minute, 2/3 falls match, with just spots, fucking off WWE spots. And Rey was still injured, so who knows how that would have turned out. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sass Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 It probably would have been best to put the luchadors in a tag team match due to Rey's injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest teke184 Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 It probably would have been best to put the luchadors in a tag team match due to Rey's injuries. It would have been better for Juvy to replace Rey since Juvy and Psicosis did have at least one match in ECW after Juvy got bounced from WCW. Juvy's already under WWE contract anyway, so it shouldn't have been a big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Honestly, there was a time when Scott's work stood out. I started out reading the threads at RSPW (anyone else remember when usenet was popular?), and Scott's work was at the very least intelligable and easy to read. It helped that it did not appear fanboyish like many posts appeared in those days. I confess I still read Scott's work, usually for a recap and not a review. Since I almost never see Pay-Per-View live, I need a quick review where I can digest the results. Scott scrapping the PBP is the worst thing he can do, in my opinion. My question. Who do you guys read on the net for good, current wrestling reviews? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Honestly, to meet your criteria, no one. Key words being good AND current. If I want results, I read Meltzer's updates. If I want good reviews, I look through our match review folder although it is dormant at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 There you go. People read Scott because he does immediate reviews, and covers just about everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 My question. Who do you guys read on the net for good, current wrestling reviews? Off the top of my head, I'll read Tom and Phil's Workrate Reports from DVDVR, Dean Rasmussen if he feels like doing a Workrate Report rather than a Comic like he does these days for Smackdown, Chris Coey's reviews, and reviews here, specifically goodhelmet's, Loss' and Tim Cooke's. I'll also read Tim's stuff at DVDVR as well. That pretty much covers everything these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 I still read Scott Keith. He has similar tastes to mine as far as the WWF style goes. I find no use for him with anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 I'll second the Workrate reports at DVDVR. And Dean's Smackdown comics as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts